Poor state of Test Cricket batting

[PhatBoy]

There's this great thing called Youtube where you can watch extended highlights (like an hour plus) of a lot of matches from the 80s and early 90s. Watch them and tell me all the batsman have great techniques. There are some absolute shockers outside the gun players.

This. Geoff Marsh somehow built this reputation as a prototypical Aussie opener powerhouse - the guy hit 4 centuries in 50-odd tests. Pakistan’s most influential top order pairing were Mohsin Khan and Mudassar Nazar ... who both averaged 38.
John Wright was Nz’s most prolific batsman of the 80s - he averaged 39.

Was it a tough decade to open?
Against the West Indies it was. Against pakistan it was.

Against Sri Lanka it wasn’t. England’s production line of dobbler bowling seamers wasn’t a threat. Unless you were an Englishman hosting an Ashes series, it wasn’t until 89-92 that you had to open against any top quality against Australia. See off Kapil Dev against India and their next best quick was better at batting than he was at bowling (Prabakhar).
Get past Hadlee and you were up against Danny Morrison from New Zealand, and the all star squad of Snedden/Chatfield/Patel/Willie Watson/John Bracewell.

F*** me you’d swear blind every attack back then had 3 players averaging in the 20s..... almost like Australia, SA, India, England, West Indies and New Zealand do right now.....

 

[footyfan1978]

In the 80s through to early 90s, the bowling ‘stars

Never said anything about the 90's myself in regards to some claiming sensational eras of Test bowling.

Read again...

What about the sensational state of Test Cricket bowling now?

those claiming the word sensational state of Test bowling, are way off. But the bowling is least not in a trough. Still some good bowlers around but as a batch nothing sensational.

90's about the same as now as far as bowling goes. for mine. I do not think bowling standards change much over time. But there are times of peaks and lows. There is not a low or high of bowling now in Test standards, imo, so why somebody calling it sensational is just weird. But I do agree a poor era right now for batting in particular. Not many genuinely excite me in Test matches in the batting.

Late 70's to early 80's was genuinely sensational for pace bowling. Never seen anything like it since. You had Lille, Hadlee, Roberts, Holding, Thomson, Imran Khan, Joel Garner and Garth Le Roux as seriously sensational era of pace bowling. John Snow of England was meant to be damn good too but he wad finished before I started watching. England had good bowlers but no sensational pace bowlers after Snow went. Australia had some good depth of pace bowlers like Lenny Pascoe that was fast but he was not a great bowler. Similar Windies had Colin Croft and Wayne Daniel very fast but like Pascoe a bit erratic. Rodney Hogg come on scene as World Series Cricket finished up. He had sensational start and Windies had Malcom Marshall eased into it as Andy Roberts was close to retirement. Holding, Roberts, Garner and Marshall together was SENSATIONAL. Thommo and Lillee in mid 70s was SENSATIONAL. But there was also some seriously top notch swing bowlers around. Terry Alderman was incredible in right conditions. Lance Cairns for New Zealand. Imran Khan, Lillee and Hadlee just absolute masters of swing bowling but unlike Alderman did not rely on it as they had pace and other skills too. As this era closed down Craig McDermott was very fast early on and Geoff Lawson not far off too. But once Roberts, Lilllee and Holding finished up similar period the sensational era of pace bowlers was over and back to normal transmission. Marshall and Imran were still around. Ambrose come along to replace Garner at some point.1975 to 1981 probably the truly SENSATIONAL era of pace bowlers. I was too young to catch the mid 70's with Thommo in his prime but saw enough of Lillee, Hadlee, Roberts, Holding, Garner and Imran Khan to be in awe of how many brilliant pace bowlers all around at similar time. Lilllee and Hadlee easily the most skillful pace bowlers I seen. To be around at same time was freakish.

 

[corbies]

Better than last few years..easily. 80s Windies alone would have destroyed many openers averages. You’re comparing ‘ 80-92, their peak period. Plus openers of that time didn’t have luxury of Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Zimbabwe have played 24 tests in the last 14 years. They would barely effect anyones stats.

Also have you watched any test matches from Bangladesh recently? Their spin bowlers are class at home.

 

[PhatBoy]

Better than last few years..easily. 80s Windies alone would have destroyed many openers averages. You’re comparing ‘ 80-92, their peak period. Plus openers of that time didn’t have luxury of Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Yeah and Sri Lanka were a real powerhouse in that era hahahaha
The current SA bowling attack has a FIFTH CHOICE paceman who just won a man of the series award. Their side didn’t exist in the 80s.

 

[Wedge McManus]

Alot of bowlers got cheap wickets back in the day due to shitty uncovered or green wickets not to mention pitches that cracked up big time on the fifth day and spin become deadly. The bowlers have to really earn their wickets today and they do it well

 

[PhatBoy]

Zimbabwe have played 24 tests in the last 14 years. They would barely effect anyones stats.

Also have you watched any test matches from Bangladesh recently? Their spin bowlers are class at home.

I don’t think he watches a lot of cricket at all to be honest

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Yeah and Sri Lanka were a real powerhouse in that era hahahaha
The current SA bowling attack has a FIFTH CHOICE paceman who just won a man of the series award. Their side didn’t exist in the 80s.

Ok irrelevant. Someone compare the bowlers of 80s v bowlers since 2010

Yeah and Sri Lanka were a real powerhouse in that era hahahaha
The current SA bowling attack has a FIFTH CHOICE paceman who just won a man of the series award. Their side didn’t exist in the 80s.

Sri Lanka played less than 30 tests in 80s compared with just under 90 since 2010.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Alot of bowlers got cheap wickets back in the day due to shitty uncovered or green wickets not to mention pitches that cracked up big time on the fifth day and spin become deadly. The bowlers have to really earn their wickets today and they do it well

No uncovered wickets in 80 90s, if anything there were more green tops

 

[Wedge McManus]

No uncovered wickets in 80 90s, if anything there were more green tops

That's why I said back in the day. Green tops were pretty handy to those bowlers though. Yes alot of them were excellent but I'd imagine they'd find it tough these days on commercial pitches

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

I don’t think he watches a lot of cricket at all to be honest

Well argued

 

[corbies]

Sri Lanka played less than 30 tests in 80s compared with just under 90 since 2010.

Yeah so more than Zimbabwe have in the last 14 years which you're saying is padding current batsmen's stats?

 

[weetert]

Let's remove Latham from the "next echelon". Stat padding against Ban, SL and Zim doesn't count.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

That's why I said back in the day. Green tops were pretty handy to those bowlers though. Yes alot of them were excellent but I'd imagine they'd find it tough these days on commercial pitches

Didn’t impact the Windies or elite bowlers of the time as much. Did as much damage on dry pitches of England and Australia.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Zimbabwe have played 24 tests in the last 14 years. They would barely effect anyones stats.

Also have you watched any test matches from Bangladesh recently? Their spin bowlers are class at home.

Or does it further strengthen argument of poor players of spin atm?

 

[corbies]

Or does it further strengthen argument of poor players of spin atm?

Or does it prove how shit the spinners of the 80's were?

 

[Wedge McManus]

Didn’t impact the Windies or elite bowlers of the time as much. Did as much damage on dry pitches of England and Australia.

Do you read posts before replying? I said alot of them were excellent. You don't need to repeat yourself when someone replies and acknowledges your point

 

[PhatBoy]

Ok irrelevant. Someone compare the bowlers of 80s v bowlers since 2010


Sri Lanka played less than 30 tests in 80s compared with just under 90 since 2010.

Well I can tell you there’s two bowlers in one current team who have strike rates better than anyone else in the last century of cricket without needing to bother looking up a stat sheet because it’s that widely known.
Their teammate Philander has taken 200 wickets at 22.

Pakistan’s current attack contains two bowlers who have marched their way to an 82-year record for being fastest in the sport to 200 wickets (Yasir Shah) and the second fastest in history to 50 wickets (Mohammad Abbas).

Oh, and the West Indies’ third or fourth seamer took 32 wickets at 12 last year.

Their opener has averaged 22 since returning from a car accident two years ago.

That’s all without bothering to look at a single resource.

New Zealand are fielding their best ever pace attack.

England’s new ball pairing has over 1000 test wickets between them. The first time that’s happened in history.

 

[PhatBoy]

Well argued

Mate you’ve just been schooled repeatedly using facts and figures rather than ‘the vibe’ so your right to critique anyone’s arguing skills is hanging by a tenuous at best thread.

 

[corbies]

Well I can tell you there’s two bowlers in one current team who have strike rates better than anyone else in the last century of cricket without needing to bother looking up a stat sheet because it’s that widely known.
Their teammate Philander has taken 200 wickets at 22.

Pakistan’s current attack contains two bowlers who have marched their way to an 82-year record for being fastest in the sport to 200 wickets (Yasir Shah) and the second fastest in history to 50 wickets (Mohammad Abbas).

Oh, and the West Indies’ third or fourth seamer took 32 wickets at 12 last year.

Their opener has averaged 22 since returning from a car accident two years ago.

That’s all without bothering to look at a single resource.

New Zealand are fielding their best ever pace attack.

England’s new ball pairing has over 1000 test wickets between them. The first time that’s happened in history.

None of this matters. He'll just say it proves how shit the batsman are when spuds like Philander and Rabada get wickets.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Well I can tell you there’s two bowlers in one current team who have strike rates better than anyone else in the last century of cricket without needing to bother looking up a stat sheet because it’s that widely known.
Their teammate Philander has taken 200 wickets at 22.

Pakistan’s current attack contains two bowlers who have marched their way to an 82-year record for being fastest in the sport to 200 wickets (Yasir Shah) and the second fastest in history to 50 wickets (Mohammad Abbas).

Oh, and the West Indies’ third or fourth seamer took 32 wickets at 12 last year.

Their opener has averaged 22 since returning from a car accident two years ago.

That’s all without bothering to look at a single resource.

New Zealand are fielding their best ever pace attack.

England’s new ball pairing has over 1000 test wickets between them. The first time that’s happened in history.

With batting these days it’s no surprise.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Footwork these days is garbage

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Mate you’ve just been schooled repeatedly using facts and figures rather than ‘the vibe’ so your right to critique anyone’s arguing skills is hanging by a tenuous at best thread.

You’ve schooled nothing mate, you show me stats for a period and ignore the most dominant team in test history!! Wow...anyway I have a Super Bowl to watch...go watch some YouTube on Windies teams

 

[PhatBoy]

Realistically the only argument anyone could definitely make to say that the standard of cricket - batting or bowling - is higher or lower now than in the 80s would be entirely based on what you see. There’s not a single mathematical case you can mount.

The batting numbers overall have fallen - while still being not much different to the 80s in terms of overall depth - but the bowling numbers have improved. So has the bowling gotten better, or the batting gotten worse. They can’t BOTH have gotten worse, if we are using numbers as any guide.

Now the era, say, 1990 through to 2005 - I would consider the batting from that period to be improved from what we have at the moment. South Africa and New Zealand, and MAYBE Pakistan (with Younis, Misbah, Azar, Sarfraz and Shafiq) are the only major sides who have fielded BETTER batting sides in the years since 2005 than they did during this era. Australia, England, Sri Lanka, India, West Indies all had better top 7s in that period than they do now.

But the throwback to the 80s doesn’t have any merit.

 

[jackster83]

We've had quite a few ATG or close to that level batsmen retire in the last five or so years.

Smith, Kallis, ABDV, KP, Cook, Sanga, Jayawardene, Younis, Chanderpaul and Clarke.

Only Smith and Kohli are on the level of these guys, with Williamson and Pujara not too far behind.

Babar Azam looks the best prospect out of the younger generation. Just needs to learn how to convert starts (ditto Head).

 

[PhatBoy]

You’ve schooled nothing mate, you show me stats for a period and ignore the most dominant team in test history!! Wow...anyway I have a Super Bowl to watch...go watch some YouTube on Windies teams

What does the most dominant team in history have to do with anything?
South Africa from 2005-2015 didn’t lose a series away and overall had a higher winning percentage than the West Indies did. You seem quite happy to ignore all the players that made that side so good.

Aside from the fact that if you remove them from the argument you take out two thirds of the best openers of the decade (Gavaskar being the third) and the five best bowlers of the period?

What have you got left without the Windies to support your argument?

Botham, Khan, Kapil Dev, Hadlee, Miandad, Border are the players I would consider superstars primarily from the 80s.

Bowling wise, if you want just a bit more help in case you still can’t get your head around it:

From 1980 to 1992 there were 24 bowlers who took 50+ wickets at an average below 30.
From the start of 2016 there are 25.